Intelligent Reasoning

Promoting, advancing and defending Intelligent Design via data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning and exposing the alleged theory of evolution as the nonsense it is. I also educate evotards about ID and the alleged theory of evolution one tard at a time and sometimes in groups

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

What does Intelligent Design claim?

-
TFT has made a request.

TFT has asked what does ID claim?

Well we can start out with:

What is Intelligent Design?

Intelligent Design is the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as the result of intelligence.-- William A. Dembski



Design theory—also called design or the design argument—is the view that nature shows tangible signs of having been designed by a preexisting intelligence. It has been around, in one form or another, since the time of ancient Greece.


ID is based on three premises and the inference that follows (DeWolf et al., "Darwinism, Design and Public Education", pg. 92):

1) High information content (or specified complexity) and irreducible complexity constitute strong indicators or hallmarks of (past) intelligent design.

2) Biological systems have a high information content (or specified complexity) and utilize subsystems that manifest irreducible complexity.

3) Naturalistic mechanisms or undirected causes do not suffice to explain the origin of information (specified complexity) or irreducible complexity.

4) Therefore, intelligent design constitutes the best explanations for the origin of information and irreducible complexity in biological systems.


IOW ID claims that Complex Specied Information, not Shannon's "mere complexity", is an indicator of agency involvement.

IOW just as archaeologists claim that artifacts require an artist and just as forensic scientists claim a murder requires a murderer, ID claims that CSI requires a designer.

Biological specification always refers to function. An organism is a functional system comprising many functional subsystems. In virtue of their function, these systems embody patterns that are objectively given and can be identified independently of the systems that embody them. Hence these systems are specified in the same sense required by the complexity-specification criterion (see sections 1.3 and 2.5). The specification of organisms can be crashed out in any number of ways. Arno Wouters cashes it out globally in terms of the viability of whole organisms. Michael Behe cashes it out in terms of minimal function of biochemical systems.- Wm. Dembski page 148 of NFL


In the preceding and proceeding paragraphs William Dembski makes it clear that biological specification is CSI- complex specified information.

In the paper "The origin of biological information and the higher taxonomic categories", Stephen C. Meyer wrote:
Dembski (2002) has used the term “complex specified information” (CSI) as a synonym for “specified complexity” to help distinguish functional biological information from mere Shannon information--that is, specified complexity from mere complexity. This review will use this term as well.


So science asks the question:

"How did it come to be this way?" and ID claims that agency involvement was required.

14 Comments:

  • At 3:22 AM, Blogger Psiloiordinary said…

    Shame we aren't given a definition of information. Kind of all falls down without that doesn't it?

    Psi

     
  • At 7:15 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Buy a dictionary:

    information:

    b : the attribute inherent in and communicated by one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something (as nucleotides in DNA or binary digits in a computer program) that produce specific effects

    Ya see Shannon's information is actually about mere complexity.

    It doesn't have anything to do with "information" as commonly defined and used.

    ID is OK with the common and standard definition of "information".

     
  • At 3:49 PM, Blogger Psiloiordinary said…

    No.

    You need to define how to measure it mathematically.

    Otherwise this all falls to pieces.

    Here is what I mean.

    Which of these two sequences has the most information?

    ACGTCACCATGATACACA

    or

    ACGACTACATAACAGTAA

    If you can't tell then how can you claim to detect increases decreases or stability in the amount of information.

    This is cargo cult science.

    Thanks for demonstrating this with your dictionary defintion.

    Regards,

    Psi

     
  • At 10:01 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Psi:
    You need to define how to measure it mathematically.

    Otherwise this all falls to pieces.


    Count the bits.

    Here is what I mean.

    Which of these two sequences has the most information?

    ACGTCACCATGATACACA

    or

    ACGACTACATAACAGTAA


    I take it you didn't read the OP.

    Either that or you couldn't understand it.


    But anyway, what does your position have?

    You want to talk about cargo cult "science" then there is no need to look beyond your position.

    No math, no data, nuthin'- and you have the balls to rail against ID.

    Pathetic Brits...

     
  • At 5:54 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    So which string has the most information, Joe? What's the matter? Don't you know?

     
  • At 11:31 AM, Blogger Joe G said…

    So which string has the most information, Joe?

    What is the context?

    Are these strings of nucleotides just floating around somewhere?

    Or is it that you too cannot understand the OP?

    What's the matter?

    I am dealing with clueless evotards.

    Don't you know?

    I know I am dealing with clueless evotards.

     
  • At 7:16 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    Great. You have no idea. Please wake everyone up when you can actually calculate the information content of something. Anything. Really, we're dying to know what the information content of any biological thing is. Please contact someone when you can provide this.

     
  • At 7:44 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Great. You have no idea. Please wake everyone up when you can actually calculate the information content of something.

    That has already been done.

    Anything. Really, we're dying to know what the information content of any biological thing is. Please contact someone when you can provide this.

    Provide the biological thing fuck-face.

    But perhaps you should first demonstrate an understanding of the OP and my response to you.

    IOW it is obvious that you are a clueless dolt whose only option is to throw a tantrum every time its ignorance is exposed- which is pretty much every time you post here.

     
  • At 5:41 PM, Blogger Psiloiordinary said…

    I'm sorry Joe.

    Wasting time and respect on you when all you want to do is insult folks.

    Bye

     
  • At 5:56 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Yes Psi, you are a waste of time and an insult to humans...

     
  • At 6:39 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    An aardvark, Joe. Jesus Christ, an aardvark. This question is months old; why do you act like no one has ever asked you to provide the information content of anything?

    An aardvark, Joe. What's value does the information content of an aardvark have? Thanks for not providing the answer (or pretending that no one has ever asked you this).

     
  • At 7:00 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    why do you act like no one has ever asked you to provide the information content of anything?

    Why do you act like I have never provided that?

    What's value does the information content of an aardvark have?

    That is the "biological thing"?

    Then figure out its essential genome and multiply by 2.

     
  • At 1:36 PM, Blogger blipey said…

    I'm sorry, I must have missed the answer. What's the information content of an aardvark?

     
  • At 2:50 PM, Blogger Joe G said…

    Yes you are sorry.

    And again if you want me to answer your questions then you have to do some of the work or pay me to do it.

    What part of that don't you understand?

     

Post a Comment

<< Home